On Thu, 1970-01-01 at 00:00 +0000, Michael Brown wrote: > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click > links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the > content is safe. > > > On 31/01/18 16:35, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > On Gentoo gcc 6 defaults to PIE and that generates and ton of > > error: code model kernel does not support PIC mode > > > > Throwing in a general -fno-pie does not seem to be the right fix either. > > Maybe iPXE should start specifying -fno-pie where needed? > > There's logic within arch/i386/Makefile which is supposed to autodetect > compilers that do this and specify the appropriate combination of "do > not use PIE" options. We may need to expand this to handle whatever > Gentoo has done.
Does that apply to every file that is built? arch/i386/Makefile feel specific for i386. I don't see how these tests are applied though. > > > What about other gcc options like __FORTIFY__ ? > > There's similar logic in Makefile.housekeeping to disable > -fstack-protector if needed. I see that, should Makefile.housekeeping include -U_FORTIFY_SOURCE then? Also, ATM one cannot pass flags into ipxe due to: CFLAGS := can it be changed to CFLAGS ?= Something like so: CLEANUP ?= CFLAGS ?= ASFLAGS ?= LDFLAGS ?= HOST_CFLAGS ?= MAKEDEPS := Makefile CROSS_COMPILE ?= $(CROSS) _______________________________________________ ipxe-devel mailing list ipxe-devel@lists.ipxe.org https://lists.ipxe.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/ipxe-devel
